1. Field of the Invention
The present invention is in the field of product or document marking or identification. In particular, this invention relates to unique product identification and protection against counterfeiting.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Counterfeit replacement spare parts and forgery of sensitive documents and paper currencies have been a severe and on-going problem for a long time. Whole sectors of the world economy, such as government defense sectors, are overrun by counterfeiters. The most affected sectors are the clothing, fashion, music, movie and software industries, which is flooded with false CDs and DVDs. The victims are legitimate industries and consumers, predominantly in developed economies. The losses are in the hundreds of billions of dollars.
A Jul. 16, 2003 article in The New York Times by David Johnston on the subject of funding terrorism stated that “ . . . The Federal Bureau of Investigation estimated in 2002 that the cost [of counterfeit goods] to American businesses was $200 billion to $250 billion a year.” A Consumer Report article, available on the web site www.consumerreport.org on Dec. 21, 2008, stated that in 2006 “ . . . Counterfeit merchandise is estimated to cost legitimate businesses up to $250 billion in yearly sales.” The 2008 numbers were probably close to $300 billion a year in the United States and more than 1 trillion worldwide.
Two Consumer Report articles, Real or fake? and Why fakes are booming, available on the Internet, state that “In 2006, a record year for seizures, 14,000 shipments of counterfeit merchandise were confiscated. . . . Investigators have seized brake parts made of kitty litter, saw dust and dried grass . . . ”
In another example, the Oct. 13, 2008 front cover of the Business Week article titled Dangerous Fakes centers on the danger posed by the flood of counterfeit electronic parts in sensitive military equipment. The opening sentences of the article read: “The American military faces a growing threat of potentially fatal equipment failure—and even foreign espionage—because of counterfeit computer components used in warplanes, ships and communication networks. Fake microchips flow into complex weapons. . . . but government documents . . . , suggest possible connections between phony parts and breakdowns.”
Security tags and identifiers to help prevent counterfeiting are well known but have two principal flaws that limit their utility. Two-dimensional (“2-D”) printed tags are susceptible to copying or printing and existing security tags having three-dimensional (“3-D”) features suffer from the difficulty of verifying that the 3-D pattern is in fact the “right” pattern, the pattern which was originally created on the item when it was fabricated. Existing patents describe a number of ways to image the 3-D aspects of the tag to verify the pattern. These include microscopic imaging, using fluorescence, and other customized read-back mechanisms. Additionally, since the image is comprised of analog data, comparison to the expected pattern is difficult, requiring pattern-recognition software and computation.
The present invention avoids the above difficulties. The security tag of the present invention uses 3-D objects, making it virtually impossible to copy. The present invention places the objects in a regular array of objects, using objects of contrasting colors, different hardnesses, or different x-ray absorption qualities, to create a standard 2-D barcode pattern. In one embodiment, the present invention uses contrasting colors such as black and white. The random occurrence of the colors of the objects in the regular grid locations create unique and practically impossible to duplicate tags. The regular array of 3-D objects is easily readable by standard barcode readers, and the data formed is immediately in binary data string format. This allows for straightforward comparison to the reference data string that was measured when the item was fabricated. As an example of the uniqueness of the tag made in this fashion, consider the format of data matrix bar codes which allow up to 144×144 binary bits. Black and white glass objects randomly filling the 144×144=20,736 sites would have more that 106,600 possible variations.
The prior art indicates numerous attempts in the past to provide a specific apparatus and/or a method intended to distinguish legitimate products, components or documents from counterfeited ones. One such well known method is stamping, which may include indentations or printing, on parts, components or products with a set of characters, such as numbers, letters or a combination thereof. However, such prior efforts have not been overly successful. As a result, the efforts to contain commerce in counterfeit goods are presently conducted mostly on the enforcement, political and diplomatic levels.
The prior art includes a number of patents and a publication that attempt to address the issue of unique tags to serve for counterfeiting deterrence. Some of these are U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,126,755, 7,399,643, 7,580,845, 7,623,624, 7,659,983, 7,791,489, 7,872,804, and U.S. patent publication 2009/0194589. These inventions have no real relevance to the present invention.
U.S. patent publication 2009/0065583 discloses a retro-emissive marking system that returns a coded-spectrum optical signal when interrogated by an appropriate light beam. This application uses fluorescent objects that emit characteristic frequencies when excited by a (UV) interrogation beam. Measuring the ensemble of wavelengths present allows for identification of the object. This particular idea is very different from the present invention in that it does not use a two-dimensional grid of 3-D objects whose dark or light random occurrence generates a unique identification pattern.
U.S. patent publication 2009/0309733 discloses a layer with randomly distributed features such as particles or fibers. The particles can be physical particles, voids, magnetic particles, or variations in surface properties such as roughness or color. This concept uses the random nature of the location and type to generate the identification. The present invention is very different in that the randomly colored black or white objects, such as suitable balls, in a fixed regular grid create the unique identification. Random features such as location and shape of threads or flaws in a volume are very difficult to measure and encode into a computer, whereas the present invention of randomly colored 3-D objects on a regular grid is very easy to encode into a computer.
U.S. patent publication 2010/0253061 discloses an optically variable security device made from a photonic crystal material. Deformations applied to the crystal layer change the optical reflection. The pattern of reflected light is then used for identification. This idea differs from the present invention in several aspects. The identification comes from light reflected off of a layer, and hence is not three-dimensional. Also the random defects formed into the layer do not form a “binary image” that can be easily machine readable.
The literary reference “Anti-counterfeiting Packaging Technologies” by Rajv Dhar was considered. It discloses “several methods of applying a pseudo-random image for each item in a batch, such as a pattern of lines or dots in one area of the carton, and then scanning the signature into the batch database via secure algorithms, for later authentication.” This reference does not discuss the use of three-dimensional structures to make a unique stamp, the pattern of which forms the verification information.
The literary reference “Counterfeit deterrent features for the next-generation currency design” by the National Research Council (U.S.), Committee on Next-Generation Currency Design, page 74, discusses embedding random patterns into currency, such as by mixing optical fibers into the slurry to form paper for bank notes. Custom photo-detectors would read out and encrypt the random pattern. This idea is substantially different from the present invention in that the random pattern formed is not “binary” and would not serve to easily identify the bank note. Custom readers or scanners would be required, while in the present invention, standard 2-D barcode scanners could be used.
Furthermore, the present invention is extremely robust against partial damage because the pattern is so unique and is suitable for application after fabrication, to paper and non-paper items.
The relevant prior art, taken alone or in combination, tends to teach away from the present invention in that the references do not consider reading the pattern formed by a random array of three-dimensional beads forming the identification stamps. None of the prior art can be combined to suggest this modification. None of the prior art can be combined in this way to suggest these necessary modifications. There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation that would have enabled a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify any prior art security or identification tags.
The primary object of the present invention is to provide an apparatus and a method for unique identification of manufactured parts, products and documents.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an apparatus and a method for unique identification of manufactured parts and documents that cannot be copied and that cannot be circumvented by any counterfeiter.
Yet another object of the present invention is to provide an apparatus and a method for unique identification of manufactured parts, products and documents that are robust and immune to damage or tampering.
Still another object of the present invention is to provide an apparatus and a method for unique identification of manufactured parts, products and documents that are capable of long-time archival identification of such manufactured parts, products or documents.
A further object of the present invention is to provide an apparatus and a method for unique identification of manufactured parts, products and documents that requires the use of existing, simple and well proven technologies to build, implement and use.
Yet a further object of the present invention is to provide an apparatus and a method for the unique identification of manufactured parts, products and documents that does not require expensive development of additional advanced technology or technologies.
Still a further object of the present invention is to provide an apparatus and a method for unique identification of manufactured parts, products and documents that are very inexpensive to manufacture, acquire and operate.
Still another object of the present invention is to provide advanced means for protecting paper or similar items such as passports and paper currencies, which may have important advantages in preventing a variety of illegal and undesirable activities globally.
Yet another object of the present invention is to provide advanced means for detecting tampering wherein by applying the security tag of the present invention as a security seal, tampering with it will damage the seal and cannot be duplicated and/or replaced.
Yet a further object of the present invention is to provide advanced means for marking machine parts permanently by using balls of different hardnesses, such as steel and plastic balls, wherein the security tag of the present invention can be pressed or stamped with a suitable tool into the surface of a machined metal part, permanently marking the part with a unique, random, computer-readable pattern.
These and other objects of the present invention will become apparent when reading the enclosed detailed description in view of the attached drawings.